Businesses will be required to register all buyers of pressure cookers, gun powder or other explosives, nails and BBs or ball bearings
By Adolf der Schweinehund
The Unconventional Gazette
April 21, 2013
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., called a special news conference Sunday to announce she was introducing a bill to prevent terrorist attacks like the Boston Marathon bombing. Standing on the steps of the Capitol Building, Feinstein told reporters her bill would require businesses to register all buyers of pressure cookers, gun powder or other explosives, nails and BBs or ball bearings.
“We must do something about the easy availability of items that can be used in putting together a bomb,” Feinstein said. “I've entitled my bill 'The Boston Marathon Terrorism Prevention Law.' While this bill will not prevent all terrorist bombings, knowing that they will have to register their purchase may keep some terrorists from buying items that can be used to make a bomb. After all, you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to know that once you register your purchase, it can be traced back to you.”
When this reporter asked, “Senator, what makes you think the Senate will pass this bill when it would not pass your assault weapons ban?”
A visibly angry Feinstein shot back: “You little jerk! ..... Why did you have to bring up my assault weapons ban? I cannot believe that some of my fellow Democrats were so scared of the NRA that they voted against my proposal. Mark my words ….. with the millions Mayor Bloomberg is throwing into the gun control campaign, all those stupid Republicans and those cowardly Democrats will be sent packing the next time they come up for reelection. And then Congress will send an assault weapons ban to the President for his signature. You can bank on that, you dickhead!”
Burt Prelutsky, an LA Times columnist standing next to this reporter, said: “Don’t let her bother you. Frankly, I don’t know what it is about California, but we seem to have a strange urge to elect really obnoxious women like Feinstein, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi and Maxine Waters to high office. I’m not bragging, you understand, but no other state, including Maine, even comes close. When it comes to sending left-wing dingbats to Washington, we’re number one.”
Monday, April 22, 2013
Sunday, April 21, 2013
A TINY BIT OF JUSTICE FOR WRONGLY-CONVICTED MICHAEL MORTON
Ex-DA Ken Anderson, now a state district judge, has been arrested for withholding evidence that showed Michael Morton, who spent 25 years in prison, did not kill his wife
A Texas Court of Inquiry has ordered the arrest of State District Judge Ken Anderson for withholding evidence when he was the District Attorney that would have resulted in the acquittal of Michael Morton for the 1986 murder of his wife, Christine. Instead, Morton was wrongly convicted and served nearly 25 years in prison until he was exonerated and released in 2011.
Anderson, who has been a state district judge since 2002, failed to inform defense attorneys that Morton’s 3-year-old son, who witnessed the murder, told investigators that his father was not the killer of his mother. Also withheld were interviews with neighbors which indicated someone other than Morton may have committed the murder.
Judge Louis Sturn, who presided over the week-long Court of Inquiry, declared: “Mr. Anderson consciously chose to conceal the availability of the exculpatory evidence so he could convict Mr. Morton for murder. This court cannot think of a more intrinsically harmful act than a prosecutor’s intentional choice to hide evidence so as to convict a defendant facing a murder charge and a life sentence.”
Morton was released from prison after DNA tests indicated another man, Mark Alan Norwood, was the killer of his wife. Norwood, who has since been convicted of Christine Morton’s murder, has also been indicted for killing another woman back in 1988, two years after he murdered Morton’s wife.
It is possible that investigators might have found evidence leading to the arrest of Norwood had Anderson not been so intent on convicting Morton. That would have prevented Norwood from killing another woman two years later.
Anderson has been charged with criminal contempt of court, tampering with evidence and tampering with government records. If convicted on all three counts, he should be sentenced consecutively to the maximum extent permitted by law. That would not make up for the 25 years Morton spent in prison, but it would give the wrongly convicted man a tiny bit of justice.
A Texas Court of Inquiry has ordered the arrest of State District Judge Ken Anderson for withholding evidence when he was the District Attorney that would have resulted in the acquittal of Michael Morton for the 1986 murder of his wife, Christine. Instead, Morton was wrongly convicted and served nearly 25 years in prison until he was exonerated and released in 2011.
Anderson, who has been a state district judge since 2002, failed to inform defense attorneys that Morton’s 3-year-old son, who witnessed the murder, told investigators that his father was not the killer of his mother. Also withheld were interviews with neighbors which indicated someone other than Morton may have committed the murder.
Judge Louis Sturn, who presided over the week-long Court of Inquiry, declared: “Mr. Anderson consciously chose to conceal the availability of the exculpatory evidence so he could convict Mr. Morton for murder. This court cannot think of a more intrinsically harmful act than a prosecutor’s intentional choice to hide evidence so as to convict a defendant facing a murder charge and a life sentence.”
Morton was released from prison after DNA tests indicated another man, Mark Alan Norwood, was the killer of his wife. Norwood, who has since been convicted of Christine Morton’s murder, has also been indicted for killing another woman back in 1988, two years after he murdered Morton’s wife.
It is possible that investigators might have found evidence leading to the arrest of Norwood had Anderson not been so intent on convicting Morton. That would have prevented Norwood from killing another woman two years later.
Anderson has been charged with criminal contempt of court, tampering with evidence and tampering with government records. If convicted on all three counts, he should be sentenced consecutively to the maximum extent permitted by law. That would not make up for the 25 years Morton spent in prison, but it would give the wrongly convicted man a tiny bit of justice.
BAD WEEK FOR TEXAS DISTRICT ATTORNEYS
First ex-D.A. Ken Anderson gets arrested for withholding evidence from the defense in a 1986 murder case that caused Michael Morton to spend 25 years in prison after he was wrongly convicted for killing his wife, a murder actually committed by another man, Mark Norwood.
Now, after pleading guilty, Travis County D.A. Rosemary Lehmberg has been sentenced to 45 days in jail for a DUI arrest last Friday during which she was ‘extremely combative’ while under arrest, kicking and spitting on officers. Austin attorney Kerry O'Brien has filed suit to remove her from office because "Lehmberg violated the public trust, demeaned her office and created a substantial risk of injury to others."
TRAVIS COUNTY DA GETS 45 DAYS IN JAIL IN DWI CASE
KVUE.com
April 19, 2013
AUSTIN -- Travis County District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg has been sentenced to jail for 45 days, and her license will be suspended for 180 days, after pleading guilty to driving while intoxicated and an open container violation.
The sentence is the harshest given by Travis County for a first-time DWI offense.
On Friday, Lehmberg made her first court appearance. KENS 5's sister station in Austin was told the DA hopes serving jail time will help the public forgive her mistake, since she hopes to stay in office. She says she is "extremely sorry" and takes the sentence seriously.
Lehmberg was handcuffed in the courtroom after entering her guilty plea. She will begin her jail time immediately.
Last Friday Lehmberg was arrested for driving drunk off RM 620. Her arrest affidavit says she had an open container of vodka sitting on her front passenger seat. Travis County deputies say she appeared disoriented, her speech was slurred and her body was wobbling and staggering.
Authorities say she was extremely combative when under arrest, kicking and spitting on officers. At one point she had to be put into a restrained chair.
Now, after pleading guilty, Travis County D.A. Rosemary Lehmberg has been sentenced to 45 days in jail for a DUI arrest last Friday during which she was ‘extremely combative’ while under arrest, kicking and spitting on officers. Austin attorney Kerry O'Brien has filed suit to remove her from office because "Lehmberg violated the public trust, demeaned her office and created a substantial risk of injury to others."
TRAVIS COUNTY DA GETS 45 DAYS IN JAIL IN DWI CASE
KVUE.com
April 19, 2013
AUSTIN -- Travis County District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg has been sentenced to jail for 45 days, and her license will be suspended for 180 days, after pleading guilty to driving while intoxicated and an open container violation.
The sentence is the harshest given by Travis County for a first-time DWI offense.
On Friday, Lehmberg made her first court appearance. KENS 5's sister station in Austin was told the DA hopes serving jail time will help the public forgive her mistake, since she hopes to stay in office. She says she is "extremely sorry" and takes the sentence seriously.
Lehmberg was handcuffed in the courtroom after entering her guilty plea. She will begin her jail time immediately.
Last Friday Lehmberg was arrested for driving drunk off RM 620. Her arrest affidavit says she had an open container of vodka sitting on her front passenger seat. Travis County deputies say she appeared disoriented, her speech was slurred and her body was wobbling and staggering.
Authorities say she was extremely combative when under arrest, kicking and spitting on officers. At one point she had to be put into a restrained chair.
BORDER PATROL OFFICERS WILL BE BEHIND BARS FOR METING OUT ROADSIDE JUSTICE
The two officers are going to do time for acting as judge, jury and executioner in meting out roadside justice. They must have figured, wrongly, that four Mexicans caught in this country illegally with $600,000 worth of pot would not ever report their mistreatment to any authorities.
U.S. BORDER AGENTS CONVICTED OF ABUSING SUSPECTED DRUG SMUGGLERS
Thomson/Reuters
April 19, 2013
TUCSON, Ariz. -- Two Arizona border agents were convicted on Friday of violating the civil rights of four suspected drug smugglers by making them eat marijuana, burning their shoes and sweatshirts, then forcing them to flee barefoot into the desert on a chilly autumn night.
One of the agents, Dario Castillo, faces up to 10 years for each of four felony counts of civil rights violations. The other, Ramon Zuniga, convicted of the same charges as misdemeanors, faces up to a year in prison for each count.
But the jury, after a two-week federal trial, acquitted the pair of conspiring to commit the crimes and acquitted Castillo, 25, of witness tampering over accusations he had asked a fellow agent to lie about what he saw the night of the encounter.
On the night in question in 2008, Castillo and Zuniga answered a radio call for assistance shortly after midnight from a horse patrol officer who had spotted a group of suspected marijuana smugglers, Castillo's attorney Michael Bloom said during closing arguments.
The two agents, who were suspended after the incident, went to a dry creek bed a few miles north of the U.S.-Mexico border, where they found the suspected smugglers asleep. Most fled into the night when the flashlight-wielding agents arrived.
Four men - all Mexican citizens in the United States illegally - were captured, and the agents recovered 21 bundles of marijuana worth more than $600,000, according to testimony from a Border Patrol training officer from Castillo and Zuniga's station.
Zuniga, 31, and Castillo then forced the four suspected smugglers to kneel and chew small handfuls of marijuana, and Castillo started a fire to burn their outer clothing, shoes, food and backpacks and ordered them to flee, all four testified.
The men testified that they spent a night in the desert where temperatures were 50 Fahrenheit (10 Celsius) and the next day were caught by tribal police on the Tohono O'odham Nation. They first said they had been robbed by bandits, but once back in Border Patrol custody accused the agents of the abuses.
"This verdict sends a clear message that abuse of authority by federal law enforcement officers will not be tolerated in our society," U.S. Attorney for Arizona John Leonardo said in a statement.
Castillo's attorney, Bloom, said in his closing argument that the admitted acts of the agents warranted punishment - perhaps firing - but not federal convictions.
U.S. District Court Judge Jennifer Zipps scheduled sentencing for July 1.
U.S. BORDER AGENTS CONVICTED OF ABUSING SUSPECTED DRUG SMUGGLERS
Thomson/Reuters
April 19, 2013
TUCSON, Ariz. -- Two Arizona border agents were convicted on Friday of violating the civil rights of four suspected drug smugglers by making them eat marijuana, burning their shoes and sweatshirts, then forcing them to flee barefoot into the desert on a chilly autumn night.
One of the agents, Dario Castillo, faces up to 10 years for each of four felony counts of civil rights violations. The other, Ramon Zuniga, convicted of the same charges as misdemeanors, faces up to a year in prison for each count.
But the jury, after a two-week federal trial, acquitted the pair of conspiring to commit the crimes and acquitted Castillo, 25, of witness tampering over accusations he had asked a fellow agent to lie about what he saw the night of the encounter.
On the night in question in 2008, Castillo and Zuniga answered a radio call for assistance shortly after midnight from a horse patrol officer who had spotted a group of suspected marijuana smugglers, Castillo's attorney Michael Bloom said during closing arguments.
The two agents, who were suspended after the incident, went to a dry creek bed a few miles north of the U.S.-Mexico border, where they found the suspected smugglers asleep. Most fled into the night when the flashlight-wielding agents arrived.
Four men - all Mexican citizens in the United States illegally - were captured, and the agents recovered 21 bundles of marijuana worth more than $600,000, according to testimony from a Border Patrol training officer from Castillo and Zuniga's station.
Zuniga, 31, and Castillo then forced the four suspected smugglers to kneel and chew small handfuls of marijuana, and Castillo started a fire to burn their outer clothing, shoes, food and backpacks and ordered them to flee, all four testified.
The men testified that they spent a night in the desert where temperatures were 50 Fahrenheit (10 Celsius) and the next day were caught by tribal police on the Tohono O'odham Nation. They first said they had been robbed by bandits, but once back in Border Patrol custody accused the agents of the abuses.
"This verdict sends a clear message that abuse of authority by federal law enforcement officers will not be tolerated in our society," U.S. Attorney for Arizona John Leonardo said in a statement.
Castillo's attorney, Bloom, said in his closing argument that the admitted acts of the agents warranted punishment - perhaps firing - but not federal convictions.
U.S. District Court Judge Jennifer Zipps scheduled sentencing for July 1.
Saturday, April 20, 2013
BOSTON MARATHON BOMBINGS PROVE VALUE OF SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS
The privacy concerns of civil libertarians notwithstanding, surveillance cameras are an extremely valuable law enforcement tool
Many cities in Europe, parts of Asia and the United States have installed surveillance cameras in strategic downtown locations. London and Singapore probably have the most extensive surveillance systems of them all. New York also has an extensive system.
In Boston, the FBI and the police had to rely on surveillance cameras of private businesses at and near the Marathon finish line. Those private video cameras were instrumental in identifying Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the two brothers who planted and set off the bombs that killed three and wounded more than 170 others. The authorities were lucky those businesses had video cameras in place since the city apparently did not.
Civil libertarians continually complain that the surveillance cameras constitute an invasion of privacy. Those complaints don’t make any sense. What privacy should people expect as they are observed in the open in public places. Is it an invasion of privacy if a married couple not married to each other are unknowingly videotaped strolling arm in arm down the street, stopping occasionally to embrace and kiss each other? I don’t think so ….. not when they are petting in public.
The bombers would not have been identified so quickly if it weren’t for all those private business cameras near the Marathon finish line. Without those cameras, FBI and ATF agents studying the bomb fragments and interviewing witnesses probably would have eventually identified the perpetrators, but it would have taken much longer to do so. The Marathon bombings should be a wakeup call for the City of Boston to install its own surveillance camera system.
Public safety should trump individual privacy in public any day. The privacy concerns of civil libertarians be damned!
Many cities in Europe, parts of Asia and the United States have installed surveillance cameras in strategic downtown locations. London and Singapore probably have the most extensive surveillance systems of them all. New York also has an extensive system.
In Boston, the FBI and the police had to rely on surveillance cameras of private businesses at and near the Marathon finish line. Those private video cameras were instrumental in identifying Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the two brothers who planted and set off the bombs that killed three and wounded more than 170 others. The authorities were lucky those businesses had video cameras in place since the city apparently did not.
Civil libertarians continually complain that the surveillance cameras constitute an invasion of privacy. Those complaints don’t make any sense. What privacy should people expect as they are observed in the open in public places. Is it an invasion of privacy if a married couple not married to each other are unknowingly videotaped strolling arm in arm down the street, stopping occasionally to embrace and kiss each other? I don’t think so ….. not when they are petting in public.
The bombers would not have been identified so quickly if it weren’t for all those private business cameras near the Marathon finish line. Without those cameras, FBI and ATF agents studying the bomb fragments and interviewing witnesses probably would have eventually identified the perpetrators, but it would have taken much longer to do so. The Marathon bombings should be a wakeup call for the City of Boston to install its own surveillance camera system.
Public safety should trump individual privacy in public any day. The privacy concerns of civil libertarians be damned!
HOUSE DEMOCRATS WANT ‘STUDY’ DONE TO RECOMMEND FEDS NOT ENFORCE FEDERAL LAWS WHICH CONFLICT WITH STATE LAWS THAT PERMIT MARIJUANA USE
Make no mistake about it, any study done to look into the federal pot policy will be a sham. What the Democrats really want and expect to get is a recommendation that the DEA stop enforcing federal laws that prohibit the possession, manufacture and distribution of marijuana when those laws conflict with state laws permitting the use and manufacture of pot for medical or recreational purposes.
Rep. Steve Cohen and his fellow Democrats are also looking and hoping for a recommendation to end the War on Drugs. I wonder how many of those congressional libs are into smoking pot?
DEMOCRATS SEEK TO CREATE COMMISSION ON MARIJUANA POLICY
Newsmax
April 19, 2013
Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., has introduced a bill to form a National Commission on Federal Marijuana Policy.
The commission would be charged with looking at the conflicts between state laws that permit marijuana use and federal law banning the drug.
The bill, introduced Thursday, is co-sponsored by Democratic Reps. Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, Sam Farr of California, Jim Moran of Virginia and Jared Polis of Colorado, The Hill reports.
"Regardless of your views on marijuana, it's important that we understand the impact of current federal policy and address the conflict with those state laws that allow for medicinal or personal use of marijuana," Cohen said in a statement.
"This conflict is only going to continue to grow over the next few years, and we must provide certainty to the millions of individuals and businesses that remain caught in a web of incompatible laws. A national commission would provide us with the information we need to create sensible policy going forward."
Cohen left no doubt where he stands on the issue. A national commission called for decriminalization of marijuana in 1973, he noted. "In the four decades since the Shafer Commission, however, the federal government has only expanded its War on Drugs and continued to prohibit the use marijuana."
Rep. Steve Cohen and his fellow Democrats are also looking and hoping for a recommendation to end the War on Drugs. I wonder how many of those congressional libs are into smoking pot?
DEMOCRATS SEEK TO CREATE COMMISSION ON MARIJUANA POLICY
Newsmax
April 19, 2013
Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., has introduced a bill to form a National Commission on Federal Marijuana Policy.
The commission would be charged with looking at the conflicts between state laws that permit marijuana use and federal law banning the drug.
The bill, introduced Thursday, is co-sponsored by Democratic Reps. Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, Sam Farr of California, Jim Moran of Virginia and Jared Polis of Colorado, The Hill reports.
"Regardless of your views on marijuana, it's important that we understand the impact of current federal policy and address the conflict with those state laws that allow for medicinal or personal use of marijuana," Cohen said in a statement.
"This conflict is only going to continue to grow over the next few years, and we must provide certainty to the millions of individuals and businesses that remain caught in a web of incompatible laws. A national commission would provide us with the information we need to create sensible policy going forward."
Cohen left no doubt where he stands on the issue. A national commission called for decriminalization of marijuana in 1973, he noted. "In the four decades since the Shafer Commission, however, the federal government has only expanded its War on Drugs and continued to prohibit the use marijuana."
SCOTLUS RULES DUI BLOOD TESTS REQUIRE WARRANT
This ruling seems somewhat confusing in that it appears to still give the police a right to obtain a warrantless blood test provided that a warrant cannot be obtained in time to keep the alcohol from dissipating. Look for this issue to reappear before SCOTUS.
COURT SAYS POLICE NEED WARRANT FOR BLOOD TEST
By Adam Liptak
The New York Times
April 18, 2013
WASHINGTON — The fact that alcohol dissipates from the bloodstream over time does not by itself give the police the right to draw blood without a warrant in drunken-driving investigations, the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday.
The case arose from the arrest of Tyler G. McNeely, who was pulled over for speeding on a Missouri highway and, the State Supreme Court said, exhibited “the telltale signs of intoxication — bloodshot eyes, slurred speech and the smell of alcohol on his breath.” He performed poorly on a field sobriety test and was arrested.
Mr. McNeely refused to take a breath test and, after being taken to a hospital, to consent to a blood test. A blood test was performed anyway, about 25 minutes after he was pulled over, and it showed a blood alcohol level of 0.15 percent, almost twice the legal limit.
The state court suppressed the evidence, saying there had been no “exigent circumstances” that excused the failure to obtain a warrant. “Warrantless intrusions of the body are not to be undertaken lightly,” the court said in an unsigned opinion.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in an opinion joined by Justices Antonin Scalia, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan and, for the most part, Anthony M. Kennedy, affirmed the state court’s decision. Justice Sotomayor said many factors had to be considered in deciding whether a warrant was needed.
“Whether a warrantless blood test of a drunk-driving suspect is reasonable must be determined case by case based on the totality of the circumstances,” Justice Sotomayor wrote.
Among the relevant factors, she said, are “the practical problems of obtaining a warrant within a time frame that still preserves the opportunity to obtain reliable evidence.” She said technological developments made promptly obtaining a warrant possible in many circumstances.
In 1966, in Schmerber v. California, the United States Supreme Court said no warrant was required to take blood without the driver’s consent after an accident in which the driver and a passenger had been injured. The fact that alcohol levels diminish over time figured in the court’s analysis, as did the time it took to investigate at the scene of the accident and move the injured people to the hospital.
In the Missouri case, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., joined by Justices Stephen G. Breyer and Samuel A. Alito Jr., concurred in part and dissented in part.
“A police officer reading this court’s opinion would have no idea — no idea — what the Fourth Amendment requires of him,” the chief justice wrote, referring to the Constitution’s ban on unreasonable searches and seizures. He said it was possible “to offer guidance on how police should handle cases like the one before us.”
“Simply put,” the chief justice wrote, “when a drunk driving suspect fails field sobriety tests and refuses a breathalyzer, whether a warrant is required for a blood draw should come down to whether there is time to secure one.” No warrant should be required, he wrote, unless a police officer reasonably concludes that there was enough time.
Thirty states use electronic warrant applications, Chief Justice Roberts said. Many allow police officers to call a judge directly. A Kansas county has officers e-mail warrant applications to judges’ iPads.
Chief Justice Roberts said he would have returned the case to the lower court to apply the standard he proposed.
Justice Clarence Thomas dissented in the case, Missouri v. McNeely, No. 11-1425. “Nothing in the Fourth Amendment requires officers to allow evidence essential to enforcement of drunk-driving laws to be destroyed while they wait for a warrant to issue,” Justice Thomas wrote.
COURT SAYS POLICE NEED WARRANT FOR BLOOD TEST
By Adam Liptak
The New York Times
April 18, 2013
WASHINGTON — The fact that alcohol dissipates from the bloodstream over time does not by itself give the police the right to draw blood without a warrant in drunken-driving investigations, the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday.
The case arose from the arrest of Tyler G. McNeely, who was pulled over for speeding on a Missouri highway and, the State Supreme Court said, exhibited “the telltale signs of intoxication — bloodshot eyes, slurred speech and the smell of alcohol on his breath.” He performed poorly on a field sobriety test and was arrested.
Mr. McNeely refused to take a breath test and, after being taken to a hospital, to consent to a blood test. A blood test was performed anyway, about 25 minutes after he was pulled over, and it showed a blood alcohol level of 0.15 percent, almost twice the legal limit.
The state court suppressed the evidence, saying there had been no “exigent circumstances” that excused the failure to obtain a warrant. “Warrantless intrusions of the body are not to be undertaken lightly,” the court said in an unsigned opinion.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in an opinion joined by Justices Antonin Scalia, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan and, for the most part, Anthony M. Kennedy, affirmed the state court’s decision. Justice Sotomayor said many factors had to be considered in deciding whether a warrant was needed.
“Whether a warrantless blood test of a drunk-driving suspect is reasonable must be determined case by case based on the totality of the circumstances,” Justice Sotomayor wrote.
Among the relevant factors, she said, are “the practical problems of obtaining a warrant within a time frame that still preserves the opportunity to obtain reliable evidence.” She said technological developments made promptly obtaining a warrant possible in many circumstances.
In 1966, in Schmerber v. California, the United States Supreme Court said no warrant was required to take blood without the driver’s consent after an accident in which the driver and a passenger had been injured. The fact that alcohol levels diminish over time figured in the court’s analysis, as did the time it took to investigate at the scene of the accident and move the injured people to the hospital.
In the Missouri case, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., joined by Justices Stephen G. Breyer and Samuel A. Alito Jr., concurred in part and dissented in part.
“A police officer reading this court’s opinion would have no idea — no idea — what the Fourth Amendment requires of him,” the chief justice wrote, referring to the Constitution’s ban on unreasonable searches and seizures. He said it was possible “to offer guidance on how police should handle cases like the one before us.”
“Simply put,” the chief justice wrote, “when a drunk driving suspect fails field sobriety tests and refuses a breathalyzer, whether a warrant is required for a blood draw should come down to whether there is time to secure one.” No warrant should be required, he wrote, unless a police officer reasonably concludes that there was enough time.
Thirty states use electronic warrant applications, Chief Justice Roberts said. Many allow police officers to call a judge directly. A Kansas county has officers e-mail warrant applications to judges’ iPads.
Chief Justice Roberts said he would have returned the case to the lower court to apply the standard he proposed.
Justice Clarence Thomas dissented in the case, Missouri v. McNeely, No. 11-1425. “Nothing in the Fourth Amendment requires officers to allow evidence essential to enforcement of drunk-driving laws to be destroyed while they wait for a warrant to issue,” Justice Thomas wrote.
LITTLE WALTER GETS TO QUESTION THE PRESIDENT
The Unconventional Gazette
April 19, 2013
President Obama goes to a primary school to talk to the kids. After his talk he offers question time.
One little boy puts up his hand and Obama asks him his name.
"Walter," responds the little boy.
"And what is your question, Walter?"
"Actually I have four questions, sir."
__"First, Why did the US bomb Libya without the support of the Congress?"
__"Second, Why do you keep saying you fixed the economy when it's actually gotten worse?"
__"Third, Why did you say that Jeremiah Wright was your mentor, then said that you knew nothing about his preaching and beliefs?"
__"Fourth, Why are we lending money to Brazil to drill for oil, but America is not allowed to drill for oil?"
Just then, the bell rings for recess.
Obama informs the kiddies that they will continue after recess.
When they resume Obama says, "OK, where were we? Oh, that's right: question time. Who has a question?"
Another little boy puts up his hand. Obama points him out and asks him his name.
"Steve," he responds.
"And what is your question, Steve?"
"Actually, I have two questions.”
__”First, Why did the recess bell ring 20 minutes early?”
__”Second, What the hell happened to Walter?"
April 19, 2013
President Obama goes to a primary school to talk to the kids. After his talk he offers question time.
One little boy puts up his hand and Obama asks him his name.
"Walter," responds the little boy.
"And what is your question, Walter?"
"Actually I have four questions, sir."
__"First, Why did the US bomb Libya without the support of the Congress?"
__"Second, Why do you keep saying you fixed the economy when it's actually gotten worse?"
__"Third, Why did you say that Jeremiah Wright was your mentor, then said that you knew nothing about his preaching and beliefs?"
__"Fourth, Why are we lending money to Brazil to drill for oil, but America is not allowed to drill for oil?"
Just then, the bell rings for recess.
Obama informs the kiddies that they will continue after recess.
When they resume Obama says, "OK, where were we? Oh, that's right: question time. Who has a question?"
Another little boy puts up his hand. Obama points him out and asks him his name.
"Steve," he responds.
"And what is your question, Steve?"
"Actually, I have two questions.”
__”First, Why did the recess bell ring 20 minutes early?”
__”Second, What the hell happened to Walter?"
Friday, April 19, 2013
DIFI THROWS HISSY-FIT AT FAILURE OF HER FACIST GUN CONTROL PLAN
By Bob Walsh
PACOVILLA Corrections blog
April 18, 2013
Senator Diane Feinstein, senior senator from the formerly great state of California, was really pissed that the senate would not vote to support her asinine alleged gun control measure to ban assault weapons. She is now calling them “highly militarized” weapons, completely ignoring the fact that they are not. They used to be called “assault weapons,” ignoring the fact that assault is a verb and not a noun. Words mean things, except to liberal idiots.
The liberal rag masquerading as a real newspaper, the S. F. Chronicle, says that DiFi is “furious” over her positions failure to carry the day. She was, however, supported by her fellow Democrat/Socialist senator from California, Barbara Boxer, generally considered to be the most stupid person in the senate.
DiFi has admitted in the past that she would confiscate privately owned firearms if she could do so. Except, of course, from liberals.
PACOVILLA Corrections blog
April 18, 2013
Senator Diane Feinstein, senior senator from the formerly great state of California, was really pissed that the senate would not vote to support her asinine alleged gun control measure to ban assault weapons. She is now calling them “highly militarized” weapons, completely ignoring the fact that they are not. They used to be called “assault weapons,” ignoring the fact that assault is a verb and not a noun. Words mean things, except to liberal idiots.
The liberal rag masquerading as a real newspaper, the S. F. Chronicle, says that DiFi is “furious” over her positions failure to carry the day. She was, however, supported by her fellow Democrat/Socialist senator from California, Barbara Boxer, generally considered to be the most stupid person in the senate.
DiFi has admitted in the past that she would confiscate privately owned firearms if she could do so. Except, of course, from liberals.
CONDEMNED MURDERER’S OBESITY CLAIM REJECTED BY SUPREME COURT
Despite claims that his weight would make the lethal injection too difficult, Ohio managed to execute the tub of lard with “no problems whatsoever”
The State of Ohio topped (executed) 5-foot-7, 267 pound Richard Cooey on Tuesday for the murder of two college students in 1986 after the U.S. Supreme Court rejected his last-minute plea that he was too overweight to be put to death.
According to CNN, his lawyers argued that Cooey was "morbidly obese" and had gained about 70 pounds since he was imprisoned at age 19 because prison food and confinement in his cell for 23 hours a day had limited his opportunities for exercise, which contributed to his weight problem. His lawyers also argued that Cooey’s veins were weakened because of his health issues, and the lethal drugs would constitute cruel and unusual punishment.
On Monday night Cooey ate a "special meal" fit for a king. His last meal consisted of a T-bone steak, hash browns, french fries, four eggs over easy, onion rings, four pieces of toast, a pint of Rocky Road ice cream, Mountain Dew and bear claw pastries.
And the last words Cooey spoke before he croaked were: "You haven't paid attention to anything I've had to say for the past 22 years, so why would you think that I would think you're going to pay attention to what I have to say now?"
A spokesperson for the Ohio Department of Corrections, said the execution was carried out with "no problems whatsoever."
In my opinion, this execution is shameful, but only because it took 27 years to put his worthless tub of shit to death.
Bob Walsh says: “Damn, I’m going to feel bad for him for 15 or 20 seconds, maybe, possibly, but probably not.”
And Greg ‘Gadfly’ Doyle, referring to California’s prison overcrowding as well as to Cooey’s case, says: “It is a shame our governor had not considered decreasing prison overcrowding a tad by moving forward on all our death row inmates. That this particular overweight inmate’s appeal was allowed to be filed at all demonstrates just how broken and convoluted the appeals process has been for too long. What justice was served by this appeal other to prolong a life deemed no longer worthy of living by the State?
Also on Tuesday, Texas executed Ronnie Threadgill for the 2001 murder of a teenager during a carjacking. His execution was the state’s third this year. At least 10 other Texas prisoners have executions scheduled in the coming months, including another inmate set to die next week.
The State of Ohio topped (executed) 5-foot-7, 267 pound Richard Cooey on Tuesday for the murder of two college students in 1986 after the U.S. Supreme Court rejected his last-minute plea that he was too overweight to be put to death.
According to CNN, his lawyers argued that Cooey was "morbidly obese" and had gained about 70 pounds since he was imprisoned at age 19 because prison food and confinement in his cell for 23 hours a day had limited his opportunities for exercise, which contributed to his weight problem. His lawyers also argued that Cooey’s veins were weakened because of his health issues, and the lethal drugs would constitute cruel and unusual punishment.
On Monday night Cooey ate a "special meal" fit for a king. His last meal consisted of a T-bone steak, hash browns, french fries, four eggs over easy, onion rings, four pieces of toast, a pint of Rocky Road ice cream, Mountain Dew and bear claw pastries.
And the last words Cooey spoke before he croaked were: "You haven't paid attention to anything I've had to say for the past 22 years, so why would you think that I would think you're going to pay attention to what I have to say now?"
A spokesperson for the Ohio Department of Corrections, said the execution was carried out with "no problems whatsoever."
In my opinion, this execution is shameful, but only because it took 27 years to put his worthless tub of shit to death.
Bob Walsh says: “Damn, I’m going to feel bad for him for 15 or 20 seconds, maybe, possibly, but probably not.”
And Greg ‘Gadfly’ Doyle, referring to California’s prison overcrowding as well as to Cooey’s case, says: “It is a shame our governor had not considered decreasing prison overcrowding a tad by moving forward on all our death row inmates. That this particular overweight inmate’s appeal was allowed to be filed at all demonstrates just how broken and convoluted the appeals process has been for too long. What justice was served by this appeal other to prolong a life deemed no longer worthy of living by the State?
Also on Tuesday, Texas executed Ronnie Threadgill for the 2001 murder of a teenager during a carjacking. His execution was the state’s third this year. At least 10 other Texas prisoners have executions scheduled in the coming months, including another inmate set to die next week.
SYRIAN REBELS ARE THREAT TO ISRAEL
While we favor the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian rebels affiliated with ties to Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood pose a threat to Israel’s security
The Israelis cannot afford to allow the Syrian army’s advanced Russian weapons to fall into the hands of Syrian rebels.
NETANYAHU SAYS ISRAEL READY TO ACT AGAINST SYRIAN REBELS
Israel Today
April 18, 2013
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says Israel is preparing to take action should advanced weapons currently possessed by the Syrian military fall into the hands of rebels associated with regional terror groups.
Israel has been warning the West against arming Syrian rebel groups, as many of them have ties to or are branches of organizations like Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.
But even without Western arms, these groups could still seize sophisticated Soviet arms from the Syrian government. Among the weapons Netanyahu said that Israel cannot allow the rebels to take are advanced anti-aircraft systems and chemical warheads.
Having groups like Al Qaeda or Hezbollah obtain advanced Russian anti-aircraft systems would "alter the balance of power in the region," Netanyahu told the BBC.
Netanyahu was in the UK to attend the funeral of former British Prime Minister Baroness Margaret Thatcher, who had a solid record of friendship toward Israel and the Jewish people.
The Israelis cannot afford to allow the Syrian army’s advanced Russian weapons to fall into the hands of Syrian rebels.
NETANYAHU SAYS ISRAEL READY TO ACT AGAINST SYRIAN REBELS
Israel Today
April 18, 2013
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says Israel is preparing to take action should advanced weapons currently possessed by the Syrian military fall into the hands of rebels associated with regional terror groups.
Israel has been warning the West against arming Syrian rebel groups, as many of them have ties to or are branches of organizations like Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.
But even without Western arms, these groups could still seize sophisticated Soviet arms from the Syrian government. Among the weapons Netanyahu said that Israel cannot allow the rebels to take are advanced anti-aircraft systems and chemical warheads.
Having groups like Al Qaeda or Hezbollah obtain advanced Russian anti-aircraft systems would "alter the balance of power in the region," Netanyahu told the BBC.
Netanyahu was in the UK to attend the funeral of former British Prime Minister Baroness Margaret Thatcher, who had a solid record of friendship toward Israel and the Jewish people.
QUICK, HIDE THE HOMELESS
I’m sure the Detroit cops are not the only ones in the U.S. to take the homeless out of sight of tourists.
ACLU: DETROIT POLICE ‘KIDNAPPING’ HOMELESS
By Bill Hoffmann
Newsmax
April 18, 2013
Detroit police are abducting homeless people in the city’s touristy Greektown District and
dumping them miles away, the American Civil Liberties Union charges.
“The practice of essentially kidnapping homeless people and abandoning them miles away from the neighborhoods they know — with no means for a safe return — is inhumane, callous, and illegal,’’ Sarah Mehta, an ACLU of Michigan attorney, told the Detroit News.
"The city's desire to hide painful reminders of our economic struggles cannot justify discriminating against the poor, banishing them from their city, and endangering their lives. A person who has lost his home has not lost his right to be treated with dignity."
This week, the ACLU filed a complaint with the U.S. Justice Department following a yearlong investigation it says uncovered many examples of homeless people being "taken for a ride" by the police.
A police official told the Detroit Free Press the department plans to review the allegations.
ACLU: DETROIT POLICE ‘KIDNAPPING’ HOMELESS
By Bill Hoffmann
Newsmax
April 18, 2013
Detroit police are abducting homeless people in the city’s touristy Greektown District and
dumping them miles away, the American Civil Liberties Union charges.
“The practice of essentially kidnapping homeless people and abandoning them miles away from the neighborhoods they know — with no means for a safe return — is inhumane, callous, and illegal,’’ Sarah Mehta, an ACLU of Michigan attorney, told the Detroit News.
"The city's desire to hide painful reminders of our economic struggles cannot justify discriminating against the poor, banishing them from their city, and endangering their lives. A person who has lost his home has not lost his right to be treated with dignity."
This week, the ACLU filed a complaint with the U.S. Justice Department following a yearlong investigation it says uncovered many examples of homeless people being "taken for a ride" by the police.
A police official told the Detroit Free Press the department plans to review the allegations.
INTERNET COMES UP WITH 8.5 MILLION LEADS ON POTENTIAL BOSTON BOMBING SUSPECT
The Onion
April 17, 2013
WASHINGTON—In the wake of Monday’s terrorist bombing at the Boston Marathon, sources reported today the internet had come up with approximately 8.5 million leads on who might have committed the deadly terrorist attack.
According to reports, in the hours and days since the bombing that killed 3 and injured countless others, internet users quickly took to social media sites, online news comment sections, and personal blogs to examine the evidence related to the crime and are, at press time, investigating over 8 million potential suspects.
“Photos taken at the scene clearly show a man on the roof in the background,” Twitter user David Albrecht wrote on his feed Tuesday night in one of the millions of possible leads currently being pursued on the internet. “Still unclear if he’s involved in the attack or just an eyewitness.”
“Definitely suspicious though,” a follow-up tweet concluded.
Among the 8.5 million leads that have been reported by internet users this week are the theory that the attack was carried out by a Saudi national currently in the hospital, along with suggestions that the Saudi national is actually aiding police with the investigation, and still other speculations that there is so Saudi national at all and that it was either an American right-wing extremist or an American left-wing extremist.
Additional investigations by internet users have found that the attack was committed by either a lone attacker, a right-wing militia, a single Islamic jihadist, a consortium of Islamic fundamentalist groups, the U.S. Federal Reserve, North Korea, the Boston Police Department, the anti-gun lobby, the pro-gun lobby, or the marathon’s organizers.
Sources confirmed that all of the 8.5 million theories have yet to be verified.
“The pressure cooker was filled with ball bearings and nails and was clearly wired by a professional, so you have to assume ex-military, right?” wrote CNN.com reader Jason Hogarth in a user comment, pursuing a lead first posited five comments earlier by fellow CNN.com reader and investigator Michael567. “Also, the fact that he hid the bomb and ran away suggests that he is likely not in a group, but it could just be a bigger diversion from whoever is really behind all this.”
“So, part of me wants to say an Iraqi vet or an American al-Qaeda,” added Hogarth, identifying two potential suspects. “Maybe both.”
Despite some contradictory findings, several internet users have also yet to fully rule out theories claiming the victims of the attack were merely actors hired to participate in an elaborate event staged by the government.
“If they planned Sandy Hook, which they did, then they planned this one, too,” read a Facebook comment from Sarah Lochstein, elucidating a theory based on high-resolution photos from the scene, eyewitness testimony, short clips of FBI statements in news articles, and her own reporting from extensive video rants posted on her YouTube channel at 1 a.m. Tuesday. “This whole country is going to fucking shit and Obama’s taking us down with it.”
“It is time the people are exposed to who their leader really is,” Lochstein said, in a separate report a half hour later.
While still early in the investigation, experts believe the internet is likely to uncover crucial evidence in the coming hours that will likely result in anywhere between 20 to 30 million more leads on potential bombing suspects.
April 17, 2013
WASHINGTON—In the wake of Monday’s terrorist bombing at the Boston Marathon, sources reported today the internet had come up with approximately 8.5 million leads on who might have committed the deadly terrorist attack.
According to reports, in the hours and days since the bombing that killed 3 and injured countless others, internet users quickly took to social media sites, online news comment sections, and personal blogs to examine the evidence related to the crime and are, at press time, investigating over 8 million potential suspects.
“Photos taken at the scene clearly show a man on the roof in the background,” Twitter user David Albrecht wrote on his feed Tuesday night in one of the millions of possible leads currently being pursued on the internet. “Still unclear if he’s involved in the attack or just an eyewitness.”
“Definitely suspicious though,” a follow-up tweet concluded.
Among the 8.5 million leads that have been reported by internet users this week are the theory that the attack was carried out by a Saudi national currently in the hospital, along with suggestions that the Saudi national is actually aiding police with the investigation, and still other speculations that there is so Saudi national at all and that it was either an American right-wing extremist or an American left-wing extremist.
Additional investigations by internet users have found that the attack was committed by either a lone attacker, a right-wing militia, a single Islamic jihadist, a consortium of Islamic fundamentalist groups, the U.S. Federal Reserve, North Korea, the Boston Police Department, the anti-gun lobby, the pro-gun lobby, or the marathon’s organizers.
Sources confirmed that all of the 8.5 million theories have yet to be verified.
“The pressure cooker was filled with ball bearings and nails and was clearly wired by a professional, so you have to assume ex-military, right?” wrote CNN.com reader Jason Hogarth in a user comment, pursuing a lead first posited five comments earlier by fellow CNN.com reader and investigator Michael567. “Also, the fact that he hid the bomb and ran away suggests that he is likely not in a group, but it could just be a bigger diversion from whoever is really behind all this.”
“So, part of me wants to say an Iraqi vet or an American al-Qaeda,” added Hogarth, identifying two potential suspects. “Maybe both.”
Despite some contradictory findings, several internet users have also yet to fully rule out theories claiming the victims of the attack were merely actors hired to participate in an elaborate event staged by the government.
“If they planned Sandy Hook, which they did, then they planned this one, too,” read a Facebook comment from Sarah Lochstein, elucidating a theory based on high-resolution photos from the scene, eyewitness testimony, short clips of FBI statements in news articles, and her own reporting from extensive video rants posted on her YouTube channel at 1 a.m. Tuesday. “This whole country is going to fucking shit and Obama’s taking us down with it.”
“It is time the people are exposed to who their leader really is,” Lochstein said, in a separate report a half hour later.
While still early in the investigation, experts believe the internet is likely to uncover crucial evidence in the coming hours that will likely result in anywhere between 20 to 30 million more leads on potential bombing suspects.
BURGLAR REACTS TO ACTS 2:38
The Unconventional Gazette
April 18, 2013
A woman had just returned to her home from an evening of church services , when she was startled by an intruder. She caught the man in the act of robbing her home of its valuables and yelled: 'Stop! Acts 2:38!'
The burglar stopped in his tracks. The woman calmly called the police and explained what she had done.
As the responding officer cuffed the man to take him in, he asked the burglar: 'Why did you just stand there? All the old lady did was yell a scripture to you.'
'Scripture?' replied the burglar, 'She said she had an Ax and Two 38s!'
__________
Acts 2:38
Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (King James Bible Version)
Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." (New International Version)
April 18, 2013
A woman had just returned to her home from an evening of church services , when she was startled by an intruder. She caught the man in the act of robbing her home of its valuables and yelled: 'Stop! Acts 2:38!'
The burglar stopped in his tracks. The woman calmly called the police and explained what she had done.
As the responding officer cuffed the man to take him in, he asked the burglar: 'Why did you just stand there? All the old lady did was yell a scripture to you.'
'Scripture?' replied the burglar, 'She said she had an Ax and Two 38s!'
__________
Acts 2:38
Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (King James Bible Version)
Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." (New International Version)
Thursday, April 18, 2013
FIVE THUGS AGED 14-16 BORED WITH SCHOOL, CUT CLASSES TO KILL DRIVER IN ATTEMPTED CARJACKING
President Obama and Vice President Biden, please tell me how expanded background checks and a ban on ‘assault rifles’ and high capacity magazines would have kept that gun out of their hands and prevented this murder by five worthless shits. Thank you Mr. President and Mr. Biden.
FIVE YOUNG PUNKS UNDER ARREST IN KILLING OF PARAMEDIC
By Bob Walsh
PACOVILLA Corrections blog
April 17, 2013
Five teenage boys, ages 14-16, are now in custody in the April 2 murder of Quinn Boyer, a Santa Clara paramedic. Boyer was killed in an apparent carjacking attempt in the Oakland hills. The young thugs were bored, cut school and decide to jack a car and rob the driver.
Boyer was at an intersection on Keller Ave. about noon when one of the young punks started shooting at him. He tried to drive away but went off the road down a ravine.
It is believed that only one of the punks was the actual shooter, but they may all ride the heat for the murder. The DA is determining whether or not to charge them as adults in the crime.
FIVE YOUNG PUNKS UNDER ARREST IN KILLING OF PARAMEDIC
By Bob Walsh
PACOVILLA Corrections blog
April 17, 2013
Five teenage boys, ages 14-16, are now in custody in the April 2 murder of Quinn Boyer, a Santa Clara paramedic. Boyer was killed in an apparent carjacking attempt in the Oakland hills. The young thugs were bored, cut school and decide to jack a car and rob the driver.
Boyer was at an intersection on Keller Ave. about noon when one of the young punks started shooting at him. He tried to drive away but went off the road down a ravine.
It is believed that only one of the punks was the actual shooter, but they may all ride the heat for the murder. The DA is determining whether or not to charge them as adults in the crime.
PALESTINIANS IN GAZA CELEBRATE AT NEWS OF BOSTON MARATHON BOMBINGS
Just as with 9/11, Palestinians were overjoyed when innocent people at the Boston Marathon became the victims of deadly terrorism.
ISRAEL STANDS WITH, HELPS BOSTON IN HOUR OF NEED
Israel Today
April 17, 2013
Israel on Tuesday sent its deepest condolences to the people of Boston after two terrorist bombs killed three people and wounded 183 others at the finish line of the Boston Marathon a day earlier. There were many children among the casualties.
"Yesterday, a day of enjoyment in Boston was turned into a day of terror," said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. "We send our condolences to President Obama, the American people and the bereaved families. On this day and on any day, Israel stands shoulder-to-shoulder with the American people. We are partners in freedom and in seeking a better future for all humanity."
Israeli humanitarian aid organizations offered to dispatch assistance, and Israel Police Chief Yohanan Danino and his senior staff departed for a scheduled visit to Boston to meet with FBI and other US law enforcement officials. Danino will work to further law enforcement cooperation between the two nations and provide Israeli expertise in the investigation into the marathon bombing.
By contrast, members of the Palestinian organizations Hamas and Islamic Jihad reportedly danced and handed out candies in the streets of Gaza after hearing about the spilling of American blood. Islamists in neighboring Jordan told local media that the Americans deserved such terror.
Many Muslims were "happy to see the horror in America," Mohammad al-Chalabi, the leader of a Salafi group in Jordan, was quoted as saying.
Meanwhile, the chief of emergency services at Massachusetts General Hospital, the hospital that treated the bulk of those wounded in the Boston Marathon bombing, credited Israel with preparing his staff to effectively deal with such an scenario.
Dr. Alasdair Conn said that two years ago, he had invited Israeli experts to train his staff on handling mass casualty situations. That training was put to good use on Monday, and Massachusetts General was widely praised for the way it handled the situation.
ISRAEL STANDS WITH, HELPS BOSTON IN HOUR OF NEED
Israel Today
April 17, 2013
Israel on Tuesday sent its deepest condolences to the people of Boston after two terrorist bombs killed three people and wounded 183 others at the finish line of the Boston Marathon a day earlier. There were many children among the casualties.
"Yesterday, a day of enjoyment in Boston was turned into a day of terror," said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. "We send our condolences to President Obama, the American people and the bereaved families. On this day and on any day, Israel stands shoulder-to-shoulder with the American people. We are partners in freedom and in seeking a better future for all humanity."
Israeli humanitarian aid organizations offered to dispatch assistance, and Israel Police Chief Yohanan Danino and his senior staff departed for a scheduled visit to Boston to meet with FBI and other US law enforcement officials. Danino will work to further law enforcement cooperation between the two nations and provide Israeli expertise in the investigation into the marathon bombing.
By contrast, members of the Palestinian organizations Hamas and Islamic Jihad reportedly danced and handed out candies in the streets of Gaza after hearing about the spilling of American blood. Islamists in neighboring Jordan told local media that the Americans deserved such terror.
Many Muslims were "happy to see the horror in America," Mohammad al-Chalabi, the leader of a Salafi group in Jordan, was quoted as saying.
Meanwhile, the chief of emergency services at Massachusetts General Hospital, the hospital that treated the bulk of those wounded in the Boston Marathon bombing, credited Israel with preparing his staff to effectively deal with such an scenario.
Dr. Alasdair Conn said that two years ago, he had invited Israeli experts to train his staff on handling mass casualty situations. That training was put to good use on Monday, and Massachusetts General was widely praised for the way it handled the situation.
SENATE REPUBLICANS PROPOSE THEIR OWN AND DIFFERENT GUN CONTROL BILL
Obama is absolutely furious at the Senate for failing to pass the expanded background check measure. Standing in the Rose Garden with some of the Sandy Hook families, the angry President vowed to continue the fight. Obama said the Senate failed to get the necessary 60 votes for passage of extended background checks because “the gun lobby willfully lied” that the bill called for a national gun registry.
The substitute bill now being proposed by Republicans includes more palatable provisions, such as criminalizing straw purchasing and gun trafficking, more resources for school safety, better mental health screenings, and allowing for sales of firearms across state lines.
This bill will do much more to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill than the feel-good gun control measures proposed by Obama, Biden and other Democrats. And it kills the possibility of a national gun registry which would open the door to the eventual confiscation of firearms by the government.
SEN. GRASSLEY TO NEWSMAX: NO EXPANDED BACKGROUND CHECKS
By David Yonkman
Newsmax
April 17, 2013
Senate Republican leaders rolled out a gun safety bill on Wednesday that excludes expanding background checks to gun shows and online sales.
“It’s a reflection that we don’t want to go down that route,” Republican Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa told Newsmax. “If everyone’s going to have to do a background check, you’re going to have national registration.”
The measure is designed to draw support away from a background check amendment sponsored by Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and GOP Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania. Manchin and Toomey had struck an agreement on expanding background checks to all commercial gun sales, which supporters of gun reform had hoped would help pass a larger Democratic gun control measure.
Manchin, speaking Wednesday on MSNBC's "Morning Joe," said only nine Republican votes are needed to pass the amendment, but later told an NBC reporter that “we will not get the votes today.”
The new Republican substitute bill includes more palatable provisions, such as criminalizing straw purchasing and gun trafficking, more resources for school safety, better mental health screenings, and allowing for sales of firearms across state lines. It has the support of more than 20 Republican senators.
“This bill protects the fundamental right to keep and bear arms among law-abiding citizens,” Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas told reporters at a Capitol Hill press conference. “I am confident that at the end of the day this bill will receive significant bipartisan support.”
The substitute bill now being proposed by Republicans includes more palatable provisions, such as criminalizing straw purchasing and gun trafficking, more resources for school safety, better mental health screenings, and allowing for sales of firearms across state lines.
This bill will do much more to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill than the feel-good gun control measures proposed by Obama, Biden and other Democrats. And it kills the possibility of a national gun registry which would open the door to the eventual confiscation of firearms by the government.
SEN. GRASSLEY TO NEWSMAX: NO EXPANDED BACKGROUND CHECKS
By David Yonkman
Newsmax
April 17, 2013
Senate Republican leaders rolled out a gun safety bill on Wednesday that excludes expanding background checks to gun shows and online sales.
“It’s a reflection that we don’t want to go down that route,” Republican Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa told Newsmax. “If everyone’s going to have to do a background check, you’re going to have national registration.”
The measure is designed to draw support away from a background check amendment sponsored by Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and GOP Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania. Manchin and Toomey had struck an agreement on expanding background checks to all commercial gun sales, which supporters of gun reform had hoped would help pass a larger Democratic gun control measure.
Manchin, speaking Wednesday on MSNBC's "Morning Joe," said only nine Republican votes are needed to pass the amendment, but later told an NBC reporter that “we will not get the votes today.”
The new Republican substitute bill includes more palatable provisions, such as criminalizing straw purchasing and gun trafficking, more resources for school safety, better mental health screenings, and allowing for sales of firearms across state lines. It has the support of more than 20 Republican senators.
“This bill protects the fundamental right to keep and bear arms among law-abiding citizens,” Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas told reporters at a Capitol Hill press conference. “I am confident that at the end of the day this bill will receive significant bipartisan support.”
GOVERNOR MOONBEAM’S PRISON REALIGNMENT FAILURE EXPOSED
More and more Californians are becoming victims of violent crimes committed by ‘non-violent, non-serious’ dangerous felons released from prisons and dumped on the counties.
THE FAILURE OF CALIFORNIA’S PRISON REALIGNMENT
By LAPPL Board of Directors
Los Angeles Police Protective League
April 16, 2013
Another day, another prison realignment horror story.
Los Angeles Times' Paige St. John reported Thursday that the increase in fugitive sex offenders in California, since the state changed key prison policies, is more than double that was previously believed. Citing data released by corrections officials, St. John reported a 65 percent rise from October, 2011 to January 1, 2013 in warrants issued for paroled sex offenders who were tracked by GPS units and went missing.
As shocking as that statistic may be, no one should be surprised. As we have been lamenting for the past 1½ years, California’s controversial experiment in transferring supervision of prisoners from the state to local agencies is a clear and present danger to public safety.
Want more evidence? Ask Fontana Police Chief Rod Jones. He witnessed two cases in a one-week period of violent crimes committed in his community by hardened criminals who were transferred from state prison to county jail only to be set free because of insufficient bed space to house the inmates.
The Press-Enterprise reported Fontana police and a CHP officer responding to a report of a man beating a woman at a Fontana park-and-ride facility on April 7. The man, identified as David Mulder, was shot and later pronounced dead at a hospital, while the woman died of multiple stab wounds.
Mulder had recently been released from state prison as a Post Release Community Supervision offender, as a part of AB109, the Public Safety Realignment Act. He had prior convictions for narcotics-related charges and was released from prison in September, 2012. Mulder failed to comply with his PRCS terms and, on March 25, was sentenced to 30 days incarceration. He was released from jail eight days later on April 2 and placed on an electronic GPS monitoring system by the San Bernardino County Probation Department due to being homeless.
“This is yet another glowing example of the failure of California’s prison realignment,” Chief Jones said. “Dangerous prisoners that belong in state prison continue to be released early, time and time again, to return to our communities and endanger our families and friends. Had Mulder remained incarcerated, on either recent occasion, for his full sentence, this woman would still be alive and this entire incident would not have occurred.”
Just a week earlier, the Los Angeles Times reported that another felon released under the realignment program allegedly raped a woman in a Fontana motel room. Juan Francisco Aguilera had previous convictions for grand theft auto, drug possession, receiving stolen property and robbery.
You can learn more about realignment by visiting Keep California Safe, which provides factual information about the law and links to stories about failures of the law. This law was meant to ease overcrowding in California’s prisons, but is instead causing huge problems at jails on the local level.
Prison realignment was a deeply-flawed concept from the outset. It clearly isn’t working as intended and must be fixed. The only question is how many more citizens will be victims of violent crimes in the meantime.
THE FAILURE OF CALIFORNIA’S PRISON REALIGNMENT
By LAPPL Board of Directors
Los Angeles Police Protective League
April 16, 2013
Another day, another prison realignment horror story.
Los Angeles Times' Paige St. John reported Thursday that the increase in fugitive sex offenders in California, since the state changed key prison policies, is more than double that was previously believed. Citing data released by corrections officials, St. John reported a 65 percent rise from October, 2011 to January 1, 2013 in warrants issued for paroled sex offenders who were tracked by GPS units and went missing.
As shocking as that statistic may be, no one should be surprised. As we have been lamenting for the past 1½ years, California’s controversial experiment in transferring supervision of prisoners from the state to local agencies is a clear and present danger to public safety.
Want more evidence? Ask Fontana Police Chief Rod Jones. He witnessed two cases in a one-week period of violent crimes committed in his community by hardened criminals who were transferred from state prison to county jail only to be set free because of insufficient bed space to house the inmates.
The Press-Enterprise reported Fontana police and a CHP officer responding to a report of a man beating a woman at a Fontana park-and-ride facility on April 7. The man, identified as David Mulder, was shot and later pronounced dead at a hospital, while the woman died of multiple stab wounds.
Mulder had recently been released from state prison as a Post Release Community Supervision offender, as a part of AB109, the Public Safety Realignment Act. He had prior convictions for narcotics-related charges and was released from prison in September, 2012. Mulder failed to comply with his PRCS terms and, on March 25, was sentenced to 30 days incarceration. He was released from jail eight days later on April 2 and placed on an electronic GPS monitoring system by the San Bernardino County Probation Department due to being homeless.
“This is yet another glowing example of the failure of California’s prison realignment,” Chief Jones said. “Dangerous prisoners that belong in state prison continue to be released early, time and time again, to return to our communities and endanger our families and friends. Had Mulder remained incarcerated, on either recent occasion, for his full sentence, this woman would still be alive and this entire incident would not have occurred.”
Just a week earlier, the Los Angeles Times reported that another felon released under the realignment program allegedly raped a woman in a Fontana motel room. Juan Francisco Aguilera had previous convictions for grand theft auto, drug possession, receiving stolen property and robbery.
You can learn more about realignment by visiting Keep California Safe, which provides factual information about the law and links to stories about failures of the law. This law was meant to ease overcrowding in California’s prisons, but is instead causing huge problems at jails on the local level.
Prison realignment was a deeply-flawed concept from the outset. It clearly isn’t working as intended and must be fixed. The only question is how many more citizens will be victims of violent crimes in the meantime.
FOR MURDER SUSPECT, SILENCE WAS NOT SO GOLDEN
Back in 1992 he should not have kept his mouth shut. All that may change when SCOTUS rules on his case.
GENOVEVO SALINAS: SUPREME COURT WEIGHS FIFTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS IN HOUSTON MURDER CASE
By Kimberly Reeves
Houston Press Hair Balls
April 17, 2013
Prisoner Genovevo Salinas' silence during an early interrogation for a double-murder at a Houston apartment complex back in 1992 will be the subject of arguments before the US Supreme Court on Wednesday.
Salinas is serving out a 20-year sentence for the shooting deaths of brothers Juan and Hector Garza after a night of partying at the Garza's apartment complex.
Salinas drove a car similar to one seen at the crime, and bullet casings matched a rifle provided to Houston police by Salinas' father. The point in question was a moment of silence during Salinas' initial interrogation, which a Houston Police Department sergeant equated with an admission of guilt.
On the stand at the murder trial, which didn't happen until 2007, Sgt. C.E. Elliott said Salinas answered all questions until one about whether he thought the shell casings found at the apartment would match the gun. At that point, almost an hour into the interview, Salinas "looked down at the floor, shuffled his feet, bit his bottom lip, clinched his hands in his lap, began to tighten up."
Elliott considered the behavior to be suspicious, a reason to take Salinas into custody at the time. Elliott described Salinas' behavior as deceptive and lying.
The Supreme Court's interest in the case centers on the Fifth Amendment. Was Salinas' silence protected under the Fifth Amendment, which protects someone from self-incrimination? And do those rights apply, even before Miranda rights were read to him? The Court will weigh the arguments.
Opponents say that the ability to build a case on pre-arrest silence would give police a perverse incentive to wait to provide Miranda warnings. They argue that silence could have any number of interpretations. The United States, on the other hand, argues that Salinas would have to invoke the Fifth Amendment to be protected by it. The silence was evidence of Salinas' state of mind and not an intention to protect himself through the use of the Fifth Amendment.
GENOVEVO SALINAS: SUPREME COURT WEIGHS FIFTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS IN HOUSTON MURDER CASE
By Kimberly Reeves
Houston Press Hair Balls
April 17, 2013
Prisoner Genovevo Salinas' silence during an early interrogation for a double-murder at a Houston apartment complex back in 1992 will be the subject of arguments before the US Supreme Court on Wednesday.
Salinas is serving out a 20-year sentence for the shooting deaths of brothers Juan and Hector Garza after a night of partying at the Garza's apartment complex.
Salinas drove a car similar to one seen at the crime, and bullet casings matched a rifle provided to Houston police by Salinas' father. The point in question was a moment of silence during Salinas' initial interrogation, which a Houston Police Department sergeant equated with an admission of guilt.
On the stand at the murder trial, which didn't happen until 2007, Sgt. C.E. Elliott said Salinas answered all questions until one about whether he thought the shell casings found at the apartment would match the gun. At that point, almost an hour into the interview, Salinas "looked down at the floor, shuffled his feet, bit his bottom lip, clinched his hands in his lap, began to tighten up."
Elliott considered the behavior to be suspicious, a reason to take Salinas into custody at the time. Elliott described Salinas' behavior as deceptive and lying.
The Supreme Court's interest in the case centers on the Fifth Amendment. Was Salinas' silence protected under the Fifth Amendment, which protects someone from self-incrimination? And do those rights apply, even before Miranda rights were read to him? The Court will weigh the arguments.
Opponents say that the ability to build a case on pre-arrest silence would give police a perverse incentive to wait to provide Miranda warnings. They argue that silence could have any number of interpretations. The United States, on the other hand, argues that Salinas would have to invoke the Fifth Amendment to be protected by it. The silence was evidence of Salinas' state of mind and not an intention to protect himself through the use of the Fifth Amendment.
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
REPUBLICANS PUSHING AMENDMENT TO GUN CONTROL BILL TO ALLOW PEOPLE WITH CONCEALED WEAPONS LICENSES TO CARRY THEIR GUNS IN ALL STATES
Senator John Cornyn’s proposal is giving Democrats fits because it is adopted several Democrats in favor of strict gun control will not vote for the gun control bill now before the Senate. And if his amendment is adopted and a gun control bill does pass both houses, Gov. Cuomo, Sen. Schumer and other New York Democrats, as well as Sen. Feinstein and other California Democrats, will poop in their pants when us wild Texans start coming to New York and California carrying our concealed .45 caliber pistolas.
REPUBLICANS TO SEEK CONCEALED-WEAPON AMENDMENT TO GUN MEASURE
Bloomberg News
April 16, 2013
Senator John Cornyn said Republicans will offer an amendment to gun legislation that would allow people with concealed-weapon permits to carry hidden firearms into other states.
“I could see something like this passing with broad bipartisan support,” Cornyn, a Texas Republican, told reporters today. “I’ll be interested to hear what the objections are to it.”
Senate Democratic leaders say such an amendment could unravel support for gun-safety legislation being debated on the chamber’s floor this week. Adoption of a concealed-carry amendment could sink an effort to enact the toughest new U.S. gun laws in 20 years.
“I have a great deal of concern about concealed carry,” New York Senator Charles Schumer, a Democrat, said in an interview yesterday. “New York City is not Wyoming,” he said. “You talk to our police in New York state, they think it really interferes with police work.”
Regarding concealed-carry permits, Republican Senator Marco Rubio of Florida has said people like him who have such permits should be allowed to take their weapons to other states. That measure, which came within two votes of Senate adoption in 2009, would make it tougher for gun-control advocates to support the legislation.
“That would be a bitter pill for gun-control advocates,” said Dennis Henigan, former vice president of the Washington- based Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which advocates stricter gun laws. Such a law would “block states like California and New York from enforcing their strict laws against out-of-state visitors who have concealed-weapon permits,” he said in a telephone interview yesterday.
The proposal to require states to honor concealed-carry permits issued by any state has been “a major priority of the gun lobby,” Henigan said. “In terms of the list of poison pills, that may be right at the top” as an amendment that could scuttle the gun legislation.
About half of the 50 states have some type of conceal-carry law.
Among those who have sponsored the concealed-carry proposal is Alaska Senator Mark Begich, one of two Democrats who voted last week to block the gun legislation from advancing. He and Arkansas Senator Mark Pryor, who cast the other Democratic vote opposing debate on April 11, are seeking re-election next year in states won in November by Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney.
Rubio, during an April 14 appearance on ABC’s “This Week,” said state conceal-carry permits should be honored at gun shows in place of a background check because “someone who has a conceal-carry permit has been background-checked.”
Henigan countered that “a lot of states that have very liberal concealed-weapons laws have virtually no standards at all for issuing permits.”
Expanding the use of conceal-carry permits has had widespread support in the Senate, where the proposal won 58 votes in 2009 when South Dakota Republican John Thune offered it as an amendment to a defense bill. Reid, a Nevada Democrat, was among those voting for the proposal, which fell two votes short of the 60 votes needed for adoption.
REPUBLICANS TO SEEK CONCEALED-WEAPON AMENDMENT TO GUN MEASURE
Bloomberg News
April 16, 2013
Senator John Cornyn said Republicans will offer an amendment to gun legislation that would allow people with concealed-weapon permits to carry hidden firearms into other states.
“I could see something like this passing with broad bipartisan support,” Cornyn, a Texas Republican, told reporters today. “I’ll be interested to hear what the objections are to it.”
Senate Democratic leaders say such an amendment could unravel support for gun-safety legislation being debated on the chamber’s floor this week. Adoption of a concealed-carry amendment could sink an effort to enact the toughest new U.S. gun laws in 20 years.
“I have a great deal of concern about concealed carry,” New York Senator Charles Schumer, a Democrat, said in an interview yesterday. “New York City is not Wyoming,” he said. “You talk to our police in New York state, they think it really interferes with police work.”
Regarding concealed-carry permits, Republican Senator Marco Rubio of Florida has said people like him who have such permits should be allowed to take their weapons to other states. That measure, which came within two votes of Senate adoption in 2009, would make it tougher for gun-control advocates to support the legislation.
“That would be a bitter pill for gun-control advocates,” said Dennis Henigan, former vice president of the Washington- based Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which advocates stricter gun laws. Such a law would “block states like California and New York from enforcing their strict laws against out-of-state visitors who have concealed-weapon permits,” he said in a telephone interview yesterday.
The proposal to require states to honor concealed-carry permits issued by any state has been “a major priority of the gun lobby,” Henigan said. “In terms of the list of poison pills, that may be right at the top” as an amendment that could scuttle the gun legislation.
About half of the 50 states have some type of conceal-carry law.
Among those who have sponsored the concealed-carry proposal is Alaska Senator Mark Begich, one of two Democrats who voted last week to block the gun legislation from advancing. He and Arkansas Senator Mark Pryor, who cast the other Democratic vote opposing debate on April 11, are seeking re-election next year in states won in November by Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney.
Rubio, during an April 14 appearance on ABC’s “This Week,” said state conceal-carry permits should be honored at gun shows in place of a background check because “someone who has a conceal-carry permit has been background-checked.”
Henigan countered that “a lot of states that have very liberal concealed-weapons laws have virtually no standards at all for issuing permits.”
Expanding the use of conceal-carry permits has had widespread support in the Senate, where the proposal won 58 votes in 2009 when South Dakota Republican John Thune offered it as an amendment to a defense bill. Reid, a Nevada Democrat, was among those voting for the proposal, which fell two votes short of the 60 votes needed for adoption.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)